[...]ications and not its visual manifestations

salience
(colors, shapes of knots, folds)

the qualitative categories (meant to be named)

(finding) the organizing principles

precisely calibrated
oriented space
(geometrically?)

what constitutes the logical poles of the vast spectrum of the projects in the archive (people, objects, units of time or space, etc.)

(concerning the archive) we can negotiate two types of knowledge: lists and narratives

to identify a series of key elements that allow us to rethink a wider chronology

textual archaeology - evaluates and decrypts, layer by layer

discovering (evidential) mnemonically oriented means of organizing traditional knowledge

(Montesinos's book:) “list of one hundred kings”

should we abandon the conventional terms of “narrative”
the term narrative used to describe mnemonically oriented lists of names..
narrative was just one of several different means of organizing knowledge..

graphical representation, capable of developing further degrees of complexity

“form”
recreate the ‘form’ (form : ‘state of organization of matter’)

within (this/a) variable system

“text” as sequences of cords

memorization (the creation of mnemonic relation) necessarily implies the modular organization of the knowledge it represents


constitutive dualism in many forms of the art of memory:
•order (Anordnung) and salience (Hervorspringen)
•expressivity (and power)
•encoding (Verschlüsselung) and evocation (Herbeirufen)

possible course between the twin rocks of writing: “social” and “arbitrary”

at the end it is the mental operation
(techniques of thought)

the image plays a central role in the construction of relations between (visual) themes and particularity of words, which in turn help organize narratives

...................................

these all were technical or formal questions so far


memory is a way consistency maintains itself


civil society is afraid of personal recollections and perverse databases, digital collections

is khm’s archive a state sponsored memorialization, monuments of a consistent history? (that assumes a sublime ending?)


the immemorial (in memorial)


have a strong philosophy of technology with this project
there is never merely a technological question, always already ontological

who wants to remember, solidify, and memorialize?
and for whom?
building a technological temple of memory, khm aesthetic narrative of its own history?
(first there is one big account of property that all these fragmented histories of numerous people who worked in khm are singed under one signature, of khm)

should we disavow any notion of “spirit” in khm?
we must agree that khm's render of its own history is pure aesthetic what so ever.


we must remain committed to the experimental, when dealing with archival domains in the school of media art where experimentation was in its original conception and foundational roots (as Zielinski expresses in one interview: “+25 KHM: Siegfried Zielinski” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3JQ3aTwu2s)

arte
DAS KURZFILM-MAGAZIN
KURZSCHLUSS
Siegfried Zielinski im Interview
http://cinema.arte.tv/de/artikel/siegfried-zielinski-im-interview



hybrid objects?
is the logistic characteristic of digital data inconsistent with the hybrid objects of art?



Forms of thought, from what Lévi-Strauss called the “systematization [of] what is immediately presented to the senses,”


(Jakobson)
transmutation: cognition involved by the form of translation

data ontology



what is the point of view of rationality in this for us?
(what is the point of view in witchcraft? knowledge is a performative recipe)
what is the point in point of view?

...................................

(Jorge Luis Borges - ‘Funes the Memorious’ in ‘Labyrinths: selected stories & other writings’ 1964)
in Borges story, Funes, the character unable to forget is incapable of the concept of ‘general’
solitary and lucid spectator of [...] an intolerably precise world
not capable of thought
in order to sleep, he had to imagine a direction he would turn his face, made of homogeneous darkness
“To think is to forget differences, generalize, make abstractions.”

Borges ‘homogeneous darkness’ is what we as forgetful immortals afraid of to turn to?
maybe the directions we sleep into, orientation to the cosmos?!

...................................

is archive naturally and necessarily generated (out of regular form of activity)?

a (technologically implemented) beyond


the drive to animate and mobilize; and the drive to conserve, to fix, and so forth, are mutually constitutive for modern imagery and media (from museum to archive)
archive performs a strange dialectics


to see the archive as a technological rational question, and engineering assignment, is to naively avoid the thinking about your own activity as a constructive activity 


depriving yourself of any tools to act
is archive a tool to act?


the agency of an archive..


“other ways” of composing?


marking its territory? how to make a map without giving way to the territory as an extension of the map?

["Angels Without Wings” A conversation between Bruno Latour and Anselm Franke]

the mechanical extension, Res extensa, the (descartian) extended thing, the visualizing technologies, technical drawings, has been so strong that the temptation so say “well, that's what the world is really like” is very great, especially when your foreground is all of the engineering talents and engineering skills that are necessary to assemble.



to attribute strangeness...
what ‘will’ you inherit?
you have little idea of what will you inherit
(other way of not thinking about your activity now)

*the question of future



[Ronell]

false remembrance, displaced memory, that actually repeatedly represses and disturbs ‘giving’

any remembrance involves forgetting
an official call for design an archive from khm also invoked that the institution is ready to forget, announces institutional forgetting, and disavows remembrance

remember includes the lost-member, bringing my member, the phalus (in English ‘member’ also means the male organ of copulation)


[Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. “Das Gedächtnis.” ‘Enzyklopädie Der Philosophischen Wissenschaften Im Grundrisse’ 1817. Web.]

Hegel makes a distinction of two modalities of memory:
(1) ‘Erinnerung’ (internalized memory, which is situated in the heart), (it could also be hallucinatory, might dependent on an interiority that isn't there!);
(2 and this one concerns archive) ‘Gedechnis’ (technological memory, a supplement or prosthetic device that reminds you. ==> it's mechanical, it's on the side of death and forgetting, a kind of memory that needs to be prompted) (to choose the technology of writing/archive the subject of memory is so screwed.)

***everything depends on the ways we remember!


[footnote on German memory]
[blackwellreference.com, entry: “memory, recollection and imagination"]
Plato's doctrine that all learning is the recollection (anamnésis) of things previously known but later forgotten casts a shadow over the idealists’ uses of Erinnerung.

...................................

is any act of remembrance also a traumatic experience? (Freudian take on memory) -- archive is so “not” traumatic therefore a tool of amnesia. (archive in digital age: the oblivion of availability --> media theory)
can we think of a non-traumatic gesture of socialization of memory? or memorial activity “has” to be violent in order to be remembered? (--> sublime) (like what Ali does, tattooing me, every time he tells me one of his stories of trauma)
like i said before, “who” wants to remember?

(masculinity is written all over this anxiety-ridden remembrance --> re+member, bringing back [...]